Wonder how long before members of the town council get photographed speeding, driving to endanger, or some other moving violation? I suspect that will be an interesting revelation as to how well it's received then.

Maybe it's time to develop a license plate cover that can become totally opaque at the touch of a button. Most of the time you're driving along with the plate perfectly visible. Get notified you're coming up to an LPR? One touch and it's completely opaque and the LPR is useless. Leave the range of the LPR. Visible again. Unless there's a cop next to the LPR, no problems.

“It's an investigative tool being used as a force-multiplier,” Rikki Goede, the police chief, told Ars in March 2013. “That's what tech is all about, helping us be more efficient and at the end of the day, keeping our communities safe. If technology can help with that, we should be for that.”

Not if it erodes our privacy. Installing CCD cameras in every room of every house in town would also allow the police to be more efficient as well.

Maybe it's time to develop a license plate cover that can become totally opaque at the touch of a button. Most of the time you're driving along with the plate perfectly visible. Get notified you're coming up to an LPR? One touch and it's completely opaque and the LPR is useless. Leave the range of the LPR. Visible again. Unless there's a cop next to the LPR, no problems.

I believe that license plate covers are illegal in most states. I remember back in the 90's when the province of Ontario brought in mobile speed cameras (vans parked at the side of the highway), there was a flurry of activity to come up with license plate covers that would not allow the license plate to be photographed in a readable fashion. I believe MythBusters did a segment on trying to thwart speed cameras and found out that it wasn't really possible.

Or you could just go the James Bond route and get those license plates than change at the press of a button.

Given the meandering and bizarre border with Oakland and the number of non-direct ways to enter Piedmont (Piedmont is completely surrounded by Oakland), I wonder how well this will work. You can be in Oakland, drive two blocks down a street and be in Piedmont, drive two more blocks down the same street and be back in Oakland.

Yes, most criminals are dumb and will probably have no idea that there are now cameras or that there are other ways in/out of Piedmont.

If the rise in crime is coming from within the borders of Piedmont, then this is pretty useless. Undoubtedly, they did lots of studies and did their research and are certain that the rise in crime is due to car-driving hooligans from outside the city. <sarcasm>

“It's an investigative tool being used as a force-multiplier,” Rikki Goede, the police chief, told Ars in March 2013. “That's what tech is all about, helping us be more efficient and at the end of the day, keeping our communities safe. If technology can help with that, we should be for that.”

Not if it erodes our privacy. Installing CCD cameras in every room of every house in town would also allow the police to be more efficient as well.

Thank you. We can surrender every scrap of privacy and, indeed, human dignity, and be "safe"(er). The current police fad of using data to find out if you ever did anything bad and then treat you like a current criminal is worrisome in the extreme. Apparently any means is justified by the end of "safe".

As usual this seems to require criminals to cooperate to work. Because they certainly wouldn't choose to get a ride into Piedmont in a legal car, then steal a car for the purposes of committing crimes.

It'll probably mean a big jump in active cops too. Since to do anything with this, they will have to have more officers ready to grab this flood of stolen cars they will see.

Given the meandering and bizarre border with Oakland and the number of non-direct ways to enter Piedmont (Piedmont is completely surrounded by Oakland), I wonder how well this will work. You can be in Oakland, drive two blocks down a street and be in Piedmont, drive two more blocks down the same street and be back in Oakland.

Yes, most criminals are dumb and will probably have no idea that there are now cameras or that there are other ways in/out of Piedmont.

If the rise in crime is coming from within the borders of Piedmont, then this is pretty useless. Undoubtedly, they did lots of studies and did their research and are certain that the rise in crime is due to car-driving hooligans from outside the city. <sarcasm>

ddududuududu wrote:

Piedmont is wealthy you say? Is that important? Must be, since it's the first word in the headline.

It is important for the article, and Hoos, do you really think that significant rises in burglaries are coming from a tiny wealthy town, or a large poor area surrounding a tiny wealthy enclave? If you really think that a study in this instance is even worthwhile, well thats your opinion, but I suggest that while we're at it we do a study on why people avoid bad neighborhoods. The reason couldn't possibly be as simple as that there is generally a higher incidence of crime, yes, we need a study done on this.

I'm apparently in the minority, but I don't understand why this is a bad thing. There is no expectation of privacy when driving a car on a public road.

The data generated could also be obtained by hiring people to collect license plates manually, the technology just makes it cheaper.

In the near future...

*Phone rings*You: Hello?Voice: Is this Mr. adamsb6?You: YesVoice: Records show you leave Piedmont every weekday via Main Street between 7:00 and 7:15 am and return between 5:00 and 5:15, but you did not yesterday. Has your pattern changed? Please notify us if you plan to change your daily routine, or else we will automatically send law enforcement to check on you. Thank you for your cooperation.

I'm apparently in the minority, but I don't understand why this is a bad thing. There is no expectation of privacy when driving a car on a public road.

The data generated could also be obtained by hiring people to collect license plates manually, the technology just makes it cheaper.

So you're cool with the fuzz knowing where you're going and where you've been at all times?

And yes, it *could* be collected by people manually, but that would be exorbitantly expensive and wouldn't be performed arbitrarily (unless insanity is a factor).

I'm perfectly fine with the fuzz knowing where my car is at all times yes. Until they force the install of RFID (or future tech) implanted devices on everyone they will not be able to know where everyone is. Besides doesn't the automated part just check against stolen cars / known warrants. So yes they may have the info saying my car was at place X at Y time but unless there is a reason to go back and look at them then I really doubt they would since that requires them to want to know where I was which typically means that I am being investigated for some other crime. I'm fine with the above because I don't plan on committing crimes. (I also live no where near here)

I'm apparently in the minority, but I don't understand why this is a bad thing. There is no expectation of privacy when driving a car on a public road.

The data generated could also be obtained by hiring people to collect license plates manually, the technology just makes it cheaper.

Funny you should mention being a "minority" ...

This has nothing to do with crime (as most stolen goods in the back of a van can not be identified as such by a license plate reader) and everything to do with cops chasing down and harassing anyone who doesn't "belong" in the city.

I'm apparently in the minority, but I don't understand why this is a bad thing. There is no expectation of privacy when driving a car on a public road.

The data generated could also be obtained by hiring people to collect license plates manually, the technology just makes it cheaper.

So you're cool with the fuzz knowing where you're going and where you've been at all times?

Not that I condone the presence of these LPR, but there is a *big* difference between knowing when you leave/enter the city and knowing where you've been/gone at all times.

Scanning your plates at the border does not imply/infer where you're going or where you've been. In order to infer the latter, they'd need location tracking, which LPR is not. Now if they installed these things at 1 mile increments all along the freeways/streets, that'd be a different story.

As usual this seems to require criminals to cooperate to work. Because they certainly wouldn't choose to get a ride into Piedmont in a legal car, then steal a car for the purposes of committing crimes.

Not seeing your point - if they drive a reported stolen car across the border it will get flagged either way.

Wonder how long before members of the town council get photographed speeding, driving to endanger, or some other moving violation? I suspect that will be an interesting revelation as to how well it's received then.

Edit: down votes? Seriously?

you are getting downvotes because no LPR systems are built to do those other functionsthey are literally built with the sole function of scanning plates to check for wants/warrants/stolen cars.

What I'm wondering is how long it will be before we start hearing stories about some of these "exclusive" communities being caught red-handed tie-ing these systems to speed cameras, and the like, and using it as an excuse to pull people over entering the town with a "special focus" on people that aren't on their "approved list" of known residents and their friends...

So nearly three quarters of a million on an alleged "force multiplier" cause burglaries are up? I'm feeling a disconnect here. Maybe if drive by's, GTA and various other vehicle related crimes had jumped, I could see it, but this, I smell over reach by local law enforcement under the guise of "We'll protect you if you just let us."

What I'm wondering is how long it will be before we start hearing stories about some of these "exclusive" communities being caught red-handed tie-ing these systems to speed cameras, and the like, and using it as an excuse to pull people over entering the town with a "special focus" on people that aren't on their "approved list" of known residents and their friends...

As usual this seems to require criminals to cooperate to work. Because they certainly wouldn't choose to get a ride into Piedmont in a legal car, then steal a car for the purposes of committing crimes.

Not seeing your point - if they drive a reported stolen car across the border it will get flagged either way.

Unless they drive around town for awhile first the stolen car most likely won't be reported stolen when they cross the border and there is nothing tracking where it goes once it tracks the border.

Where it could be more useful is if they steal a shitty car to go steal the nice ones then the first car might get flagged heading into the city.

I'm surprised with all of the automation being added to police activities (traffic cameras, license plate readers, etc.) that police unions aren't more actively against them. After all, wouldn't they need less actual police officers if many of their duties are taken over with such technology?

I'm apparently in the minority, but I don't understand why this is a bad thing. There is no expectation of privacy when driving a car on a public road.

The data generated could also be obtained by hiring people to collect license plates manually, the technology just makes it cheaper.

This has already been brought up in previous articles covering LPRs. It's not a problem when police are doing it manually, because the cost and manpower involved is a built-in check & balance on its use. They will only do it when actually necessary and the cost will have to be justified. However, when technology makes it practically free and they employ it 24/7, that built-in check & balance evaporates. Additionally, the massive scale of its usage creates new problems that were not possible when done manually.

In many ways, it's like the difference between your neighbor seeing you leave home once or twice a week, and an automated drone with a camera and microphone that follows you from the moment you open your front door to the moment you return home. Oh, and the video & sound is permanently saved and cross-referenced with every other monitoring system.

Edit: To clarify, I'm not saying the "drone buddy" picture is what's happening here. It's to illustrate how the scale technology makes possible can fundamentally change the issues.